نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 عضو هیات علمی پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی

2 خ حکمت.کوچه امامت

چکیده

یکی از مفاهیم اصلی در رویکرد زبان‌شناسی شناختی، این است که هر واحد زبانی شبکه‌ای از معانی است. لانگاکر (Langacker, 1991) معتقد است که «تکواژ، مقولات، و ساخت‌های دستوری همگی صورتی از واحدهای نمادین دارند»، از این نظر ‌وندها نیز معنای خاص خود را دارند که آن معنا را به پایة میزبان می‌افزایند و در نهایت معنای مشتق شکل می‌گیرد. یک پیش­وند، همانند مقولات واژگانی، مقوله‌ای را تشکیل می‌دهد که همة معانی خود را که حول یک معنای مرکزی گرد آمده‌اند، رده‌بندی می‌کند. بنابراین می‌توان گفت مشتقات پیش­وند «پیش-» نیز مقوله‌ای چندمعنا با یک ساخت درونی نظامند است. در این پژوهش برای تحلیل معناشناختی این پیش­وند، معانی مشتقات آن را از منظر شناختی به دست آوردیم و در نهایت با مشخص کردن شبکۀ شعاعی این وند، دو خوشۀ معنایی مرکزی تعیین شد که دیگر معانی از این دو گرة معنایی منتج می‌شوند: ترتیب زمانی، ترتیب مکانی. از بین این دو معنی، یکی به­عنوان معنای اصلی وند مذکور است. برای تشخیص این معنای اصلی از معیارهایی که تایلر و ایوانز (2003) پیشنهاد کرده‌اند، بهره گرفته شد و مشخص شد که مفهوم مکانی این وندِ چندمعنا، به­عنوان معنای اولیه می‌باشد که دیگر معانی حول این معنای مرکزی قرار می‌گیرند.
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Semantic analysis of pish0 prefix in Persian Language: cognitive linguistics approach

نویسندگان [English]

  • Azita Afrashi 1
  • fatemeh koushki 2

1 Faculty Member of the Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies

چکیده [English]

One of the concepts in cognitive linguistics approach is that each linguistic unit is a network of meanings. Langacker (1991: 16) believes that "morpheme, categories, and grammatical structures, all are a form of symbolic units". In this respect, affixes also have specific meanings which are added to bases and at last a derivation is created. An affix as a lexical entity forms a category whose meanings is collected around a core meaning. Therefore, we can say that derivations of 'pish-' prefix also have several meanings with an organized internal structure. In this article, to analyze this affix, its derivations are studied through a cognitive linguistic perspective, its different meanings are unraveled and finally by determining radial network of this affix, two meaning cluster were determined from which other meanings stemmed: temporal order and spatial order. One of these meanings, spatial meaning is selected as the core meaning and for doing it we used two factors proposed by Evans and Tyler (2003). Then spatial meaning of this polysemy affix was primary meaning around which other meanings are posited.
To answer the question of whether there are many meanings for pish- affix and, if so, how these meanings are related to each other; it can be argued that from cognitive linguistic perspective and based on our data analysis, it was discovered that pish- affix is a linguistic expression that has a multidimentional feature. By reviewing 63 derivatives from affixation of this prefix to different grammatical categories, two meanings were obtained, each of which had different conceptual meanings. From these semantic clusters, the spatial sense was introduced as the initial meaning according to Evans and Tyler's (2003) criteria: the historical evidence and the incidence frequency in the scattered network, with other meanings surrounding this central meaning. It is necessary to explain that at first glance it seems that the meaning of "forward direction" is a separate meaning, but since motion occurs in the space, henceforth this concept is also in the section of priority of the place. In addition, in some cases, such as "pish-shomare (pre-code)" with The close conflict was the concept of space and time, in which case, given the fact that conceptual time is abstract and occurring in the concept of space, so it is not so easy to distinguish spatial and temporal priority in such derivatives.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • cognitive linguistics
  • pre- prefix
  • polysemy
  • radial network

انوری، حسن (1381). فرهنگ بزرگ سخن. تهران: انتشارات سخن.

پایگاه داده‌های زبان فارسی. pldb.ihcs.ac.ir                  

دهخدا، علی‌اکبر ( 1373). لغت­نامه دهخدا. تهران: دانشگاه تهران.

عمید، حسن (1342). فرهنگ عمید. تهران: انتشارات امیرکبیر.

گلفام، ارسلان و مهناز کربلایی صادق (1395). «نگاهی بر واژه‌های مرکب و مشتق مکان‌ساز در فارسی: رویکرد شناختی». جستارهای زبانی. دورة 7. شمارة 3 (پیاپی 31). مرداد و شهریور 1395. صص 127-107.

 معین، محمد (1382). فرهنگ معین (یک جلدی). تهران: انتشارات زرین.

Abrosimova, L. (2013). "Word-formation in the Context of Multi-disciplinary Cognitive Paradigm". International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education. vol 1. No. 1. pp. 1-6.

Acovedo, E. S. (2003). "A Functional Interpretation of Locative Prefixes in English Language". Journal of English Studies. vol 4. pp. 197-222.

Adams, V. (2001). Complex Words in English. Harlow: Longman.

Amid, Hassan (1964). Frahange Amid. Amir-Kabir Publications: Tehran. [In Persian]

Anvari, Hassan (2003). Frahange Bozroge Sokhan. Sokhan Publication: Tehran. [In Persian]

Aronoff, M. (1976). Word-formation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Balazs, B. (2010). "Semantic Aspects of English Prefixation: A Cognitive Linguistic Account". Jelen tanulmany megjelentese a TAMOP. pp. 81-88. <http://www.bdtf.hu/btk/Hatrsvok%20a%20BTK%20ves%20kiadvnya/HAT%C3%81RS%C3%81VOK%202011_12/Bal%C3%A1zs%20Bernadett%20Semantic%20aspects%20of%20English%20prefixation.pdf>

Brugman, C. & G. Lakoff (1988). "Cognitive Topology and Lexical Networks". Lexical Ambiguity Resolution: Perspective from Psycholinguistics, Neuropsychology, and  Artificial Intelligence. Steven L. Small, Garrison W.Cottrell & Michael K. Tanehaus (eds.).  San Mateo. CA: Morgan Kaufmann. pp. 477-508.

Chrotensen, J. H. (2011). The Prefix po- and Aspect in Russian and Polish: A Cognitive Grammar Account. Degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

          <www.theses.com>

Data Base of Persian Language. pldb.ihcs.ac.ir.

Dehkhoda, Ali-Akbar (1995). Loghtanameh Dehkhoda. Tehran University: Tehran. [In Persian]

Evans, V. & A. Tyler (2001). "Reconsidering Prepositional Polysemy Networks: The Case of Over". Language. 77. 4. pp. 724-765.

Fauconnier, G. (1985). Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

Fauconnier, G. (1997). Mappings in Thought and Language. New York: Combridge University Press. 

Fauconnier, G. & M. Turner (2002). The Way we Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind`s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.

Fillmore, Ch. (1977) "Scenes-and-frames Semantics". Linguistic Structures Processing. Antonio Zampollo (ed.). North Holland.  pp. 55-81.

Fillmore, Ch. (1982). "Frame Semantics". Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Hanshin, Seoul. Linguistics Society of Korea. pp. 111–138.

Golfam, Arsalan & Mahnaz Karbalaee Sadegh (2016). "Remarks on Compounds and Derivatives of Location in Persian: A Cognitive Morphology Approach". Language Related Research.vol.7. No.3. (Tome 31). pp. 107-127. [In Persian]

Hamawand, Z. (2009). The Semantics of English Negative Prefixes. Equinox published Ltd.

Hamawand, Z. (2011a). Morphology in English, Word formation Cognitive Grammar. New York: Continuum International Groups.

Hamawand, Z. (2011b). "Prefixes of Degree in English: A Cognitive Corpus Analysis". Open Journal of Modern Linguistics. vol. 1. No. 2. pp.13-23.

Hamawand, Z. (2013). "Prefixes of Spatiality in English: A Study in Cognitive Linguistics". Theory and Practice in Language Studies. vol. 3. pp. 736-747.

Hartman, S. & A. Holzl (2014). "Prefixation and Force Dynamics: A Corpus-based Study in German Prefix Constructions". 5th UK Cognitive Linguistics Conference. Lancaster University.

         <www.lancaster.ac.UK/fass/events/uk-CLA5>

Janda, L. A. (2011). "Metonymy in Word Formation". Cognitive Linguistics. 22-2. pp. 359-392.

Jensen, J. T. (1990).Morphology, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G. (1990). "The Invariance Hypothesis: Is Abstract Reason Based on Image Schemas". Cognitive Linguistics. 1. pp.39-74.

Lakoff, G. & Zolt`an Kovecses (1987). "The Cognitive Model of Anger Inherent in American English". Cultural Models in Language and Thought. Dorothy Holland & Noami Quinn (eds.). Chicago: Univercity of Chicago Press. pp. 195-221.

Langacker, R. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.

Langacker, R. (1988). "A View of Linguistic Semantics". Topics in Cognitive Linguistics. Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn (ed.). pp. 49-90.

Langacker, R. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume 2: Descriptive Application. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.

Langacker, R. (1997). "Consistency, Dependency and Conceptual Grouping". Cognitive Linguistics. 8. pp. 1-32.

Lewandowsak, B. (2007). "Polysemy, Prototypes, and Radial Categories". The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Dirk Geeraerts & Hurbert Cuyckens (eds.). Oxford University Press: Oxford.

Marchand, H. (1969). The Categories and Types of Present–day English Word-formation. Beck: Munchen.

Matthews, P. H. (1974). Morphology. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

Melinger, A. (2011). Morphological Complexity in English Prefixed-words: An Experimental Investigation. Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, University of New York at Buffalo.

Mettinger, A. (1994). "Un- Prefixation in English: Expectations, Formats, and Results". Munsterches Logbuch der Linguistik. pp. 13-17.

Mizoe, T. (2011). A Cognitive Semantic of s-prefixed Russian Loan Verbs from English and other Languages. Grade of Philosophy Doctor (PhD). Department de Languages et Linguistque, Universite Lvala: Quebec.

Moeen, Mohammad (2004). Frahange Moeen (One-volume). Zarrin Publication: Tehran. [In Persian]

Panther, K. & L. Thornburg (2001). "A Conceptual Analysis of English –er Nominals". Applied Cognitive Linguistics II: Language Pedagogy.  Martin Putz, Susanne Niemeier, and Rene Dirven (eds.).  Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. pp.149-200.

Quirk, R., Sidney-Leech, Jan Geoffrey-Svartvik (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Longman: London-New York.

Saric, L. (2013). The Verbal Prefixes na- in Croation: A Cognitive Linguistic Analysis. Prihvaeen, zatnak 22.

Slobin, D. I. (2004). "The Many Ways to Search for a Frog: Linguistic Typology and the Expression of Motion Events". Relating Events in Narrative: vol. 2, Typological and Contextual Perspectives. S. Strömqvist & L. Verhoeven (eds.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 219- 257.

Spencer, A. (2001). "Morphology". The Handbook of Linguistics. M. Aronoff & J. Rees-Miller (eds.).  Malden, MA: Blackwell. pp. 213-237.

Talmy, L. (2000a).Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol. I: Concept Structuring     Systems. i-viii. 1-   565. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Talmy, L. (2000b). Toward a Cognitive Semantics: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. vol 2. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.

Talmy, L.  (2007). "Lexical Typologies". Language Typology and Syntactic Universals (2nd Edition). T. Shopen (ed.).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Taylor, J. R. (1998). "Syntactic Constructions as Prototype Categories". The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure. M. Tomasello (ed.).  Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. pp. 177–202.

Tchizmarova, I. K. (2006). "A Cognitive Linguistics Analysis of the Bulgarian Verbal Prefixes". Retrieved from:

         < http://seelrc.org>

Tchizmarova, I. K. (2012). "A Cognitive Linguistics Analysis of the Bulgarian Verbal Prefixes".  Jezitoslovle. pp. 219-260.

Tyler, A. & V. Evans (2003). The Semantics of English Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.